"They could accidentally be about consciousness, sure."
That's your argument, indeed, that it would be accidental. But an actual epiphenomenalist will come equipped with a colorable argument otherwise. (It sounds like you probably have some familiarity with the philosophical literature on "intentionality" which is their term for "aboutness"?)
But I'm not into this "causal cul de sac" epiphenomenalism -- I just don't see how it's of any use except as a defensive position -- so that's all I'll speak for them.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
That's your argument, indeed, that it would be accidental. But an actual epiphenomenalist will come equipped with a colorable argument otherwise. (It sounds like you probably have some familiarity with the philosophical literature on "intentionality" which is their term for "aboutness"?)
But I'm not into this "causal cul de sac" epiphenomenalism -- I just don't see how it's of any use except as a defensive position -- so that's all I'll speak for them.